ArticleJournal of applied oral science : revista FOB2018
The effects of different restorative materials on periodontopathogens in combined restorative-periodontal treatment.
Article in Journal of applied oral science : revista FOB, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- The Interplay Between Periodontitis, Caries and Dental Restorations in an Adult Population.Journal of clinical periodontology · 2026Article
- Phytochemical profile and antimicrobial activity ofHeliyon · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective The aim of the study was to evaluate the association between subgingival restorations and the target periodontopathogenic bacteria (Pg, Td and Pi) in subgingival biofilm during one year after combined restorative-periodontal treatment. Material and Methods Seventeen systemically healthy subjects, who were positive for the presence of three cervical lesions associated with gingival recessions in three different adjacent teeth, were included in the study. A total of 51 combined defects were treated with connective tissue graft plus a nanofilled composite resin (NCR+CTG), a resin-modified glass ionemer cement (RMGI+CTG) and a fluoride-releasing resin material with pre-reacted glass (PRG), called giomer (Giomer+CTG). Periodontal clinical measurements and subgingival plaque samples were obtained from all combined defects at baseline and at 6 and 12 months after the surgery. The number of bacteria were evaluated by the real-time polymerase chain reaction (qPCR) method. Results No statistically significant difference in the amount of DNA copies of Pg, Td and Pi was observed in any of the groups at any time points (p>0.05). In addition, there was no statistically significant difference in the amount of DNA copies of the bacteria at baseline and at 6 and 12 months postoperatively, regardless of treatment group (p>0.05). Conclusion This study suggests that subgingivally placed NCR, RMGI and giomer restorations can show similar effects on periodontopathogenic bacteria in the treatment of gingival recessions that are associated with noncarious cervical lesions (NCCLs).
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.